UPDATE

As of 12/9/2020, the majority of the content of this post is no longer applicable. 18 states (inclduing Arizona) have now filled Amicus Briefs with the TX case, and president has filled a motion to join the case as well. THIS IS GREAT NEWS!!!!

The purpose of this post was a success. By pointing out to people that no state had yet joined the lawsuit on 12/8/2020, we ensured that everyone that could call, indeed did call, their AGs, Govs, and Reps, and demand them to join the lawsuit. Our work is not yet done, more states AGs must join the cause. Keep up the great work folks, make sure to double check your sources, and never hesitate to ask a pede for a source, especially if there's only a screenshot or a tweet from a random person involved

Trump 2020, let's fucking go

Post as of 12/8/2020 for reference.

1. No other state has joined the TX lawsuit. Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Missouri AGs have released statements appreciating or supporting the lawsuit, but no state has yet joined the lawsuit. This could change, but for now, none has

2. SCOTUS has NOT accepted the TX case. The case has been docketed, just like the PA case had been docketed. SCOTUS has yet to decide if they will hear the case, while I do expect them to, they haven't done so yet.

UPDATE (update 7 below): Big update on this below. u/SellTheSun elaborates extensively on how this case is different from the Kelly filing, and what the aproximate timeline looks like. TLDR, we're likely in a better position than I initially made it appear, at least from a position of SCOTUS hearing or responding to this case in some manner.

3. SCOTUS has not rejected the Mike Kelly PA lawsuit. Jenna Ellis says "The Supreme Court only denied emergency injunctive relief. In the order, it did NOT deny cert. @MikeKellyPA’s suit is still pending before the U.S. Supreme Court." This means that the merits of the case have not been rejected, and the case not only is still active, but can also be merged with the TX case. It can also not be, and the TX case can be independent. No certainties here.

Sources:

Louisiana's AG's Statement (supporting but not joining the lawsuit): https://www.kplctv.com/2020/12/08/louisiana-ag-throws-support-behind-texas-election-lawsuit/

Alabama's AG's Statement (supporting the arguments of the TX lawsuit but not joining it): https://twitter.com/AGSteveMarshall/status/1336435391403057156

Mike Kelly PA's docketed case: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/20a98.html

See how Mike Kelly's case is DOCKETED on December 3rd. Doesn't mean that it was heard. Again, I hope, and honestly, expect, that SCOTUS will hear the TX case, but doesn't mean that SCOTUS will.

Update 1: From now on any new edits, I'll add as updates.

Arkansas AG says she will help TX case in any legal way she can. Hasn't joined the lawsuit yet either.

Source: https://twitter.com/AGRutledge/status/1336452654982160392

Update 2: Added a third point regarding the "rejection" of the Mike Kelly Case. Source: https://twitter.com/JennaEllisEsq/status/1336451735150350336

Update 3: Ted Cruz has made a statement with respect to Mike Kelly's lawsuit lamenting on SCOTUS: https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1336467262975467520

IANAL so I'm not sure how this coincides with Lawyer Jenna Ellis, but for the sake of transparency, I'm adding it here to have everything in one place.

Going through the comments as rapidly as I can and responding. Saw the AG-Elect from Indiana supporting the TX lawsuit (but he's AG-Elect, so no authority yet right?). IDK, for reference, link is: https://www.facebook.com/ToddRokitaIN/posts/10158842063228252

Update 4: Front Page post https://thedonald.win/p/11QlTrBLmj/its-working-louisiana-to-join-te/c/ regarding LA joining TX lawsuit is bullshit. They released a statement, which if you actually read, says they support the TX lawsuit and already have their own lawsuit in the pipeline.

LA AG Statement: http://agjefflandry.com/Article/10825

Only the U.S. Supreme Court can ultimately decide cases of real controversy among the states under our Constitution. That is why the Justices should hear and decide the case [referring to an older case linked below] which we have joined representing the citizens of Louisiana. Furthermore, the U.S. Supreme Court should consider the most recent Texas motion, which contains some of the same arguments.

That older lawsuit is: http://agjefflandry.com/Files/Article/10808/Documents/2020-11-09-RepublicanPartyofPa.v.Boockvar-AmicusBriefofMissourietal.-FinalWithTables.pdf

It appears to be solely against the events which took place in PA.

Update 5 -- taking a 75 mins break at 9:20 TT. Will be back in the evening to respond to as many comments as i can and keep updating as we find out and learn new information.

Update 6 -- Missouri AG says he'll support TX in any way he can.

Source: https://twitter.com/Eric_Schmitt/status/1336506935982624768

Update 7 -- The texas vs. PA et. al. SCOTUS case

u/SellTheSun is amazing. Catch the entire thread, so that you can follow along, and perhaps even ask clarifications on your own starting at https://thedonald.win/p/11QlTuYt7R/massive-disinformation-effort-on/c/4DqchljeYgF

Points made by u/SellTheSun:

• in regards to the PA case was an application for emergency injunction (and the injunction was docketed), (https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/20a98.html) with the petition for a writ of cert pending. The case was not docketed since it has not been filed yet.
• In regards to the Texas case, not only was a motion for an injunction and temporary restraining order added to the docket, the case itself was added to the docket as well. (https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/22o155.html)
• See requested timeline details in his comment (don't want to regurgitate his words): https://thedonald.win/p/11QlTuYt7R/x/c/4DqchqPArWT (we are currently 1 day behind from the TX requested timeline)
• Oral Arguments could be heard, it could also just go back and forth with briefs. But SCOTUS will certainly rule on the injunction in one way or another, and since the case was docketed, they (the TX AG + folks) are way ahead of where the PA Kelly case is.

I understand this may still be confusing. Please comment on the thread at https://thedonald.win/p/11QlTuYt7R/massive-disinformation-effort-on/c/4DqchljeYgF and page both me and u/SellTheSun so we can update as necessary.

u/SellTheSun, please tell me if I'm missing something or should clarify something further.

Update 8 -- An update from Jeff Landy, LA AG

In a FB comment on his statement regarding the TX lawsuit, Jeff Landry clarified that NO STATE can join the lawsuit until SCOTUS agrees to hear the case (which further clarifies that SCOTUS hasn't agreed to hear the case just yet -- follow along update 7 for a tmeline):

Other states are not able to join Texas until the court agrees to hear the case. Separately, I already put Louisiana on record on a different case on the same, or similar merits, weeks and weeks ago long before the Texas filing was made.

u/SellTheSun can correct me on this, but I believe Jeff Landry can still file an Amicus Brief in the TX case which he hasn't yet done.

Source: Jeff Landry, AG of Louisiana in a FB comment on this post: https://www.facebook.com/LandryforLA/posts/3694419443954498